This bibliography includes a selection of works discussing Sanskritization in
more than one sense.

A. The term was originally popularized by M.N. Srinivas in his dissertation, where
he used it to characterize the gradual upward movement in the social status of a
caste by means of the deliberate adoption of social and religious practices
(such as vegetarianism, employment of brahmin priests, use of meatless
offerings, Sanskrit mantras, and other elements of Brahmanical cultic practice)
that are associated with brahmins or deemed prestigious because they are
approved or promulgated in Brahmanical literature (or by brahmin authorities in
other fora), regardless of whether the Sanskrit language is used to express
those ideals.

B. It has subsequently been found useful to analyze broad historical trends,
including the assimilation of regional, tribal, caste-specific, or 'folk'
beliefs, legends, and practices into Brahmanical literary and ritual tradition (Eschmann's
studies of the cult of Jagannath is a classic case), often fostered by rulers
who sought to legitimize their authority by linking it to Brahmanical
institutions (such as ritual and textual traditions) and by importing and
patronizing brahmin groups. The spread of the use of Sanskrit as a
language of high-cultural expression is one of the important and characteristic
features of this process, but not an indispensable one.

Process A might be seen generally as a "bottom-up" process (in which the
assimilative initiative comes from outside brahmin or other high-caste circles)
while Process B more often has a "top-down" character.

The term 'Sanskritization' has been criticized on various grounds, and
alternatives have been proposed, all of which seem to suffer from similar
limitations. One fundamental criticism is that these terms might seem to
imply that the Brahmanical/Hindu/Sanskritic culture is a totalizing, monolithic
entity that is capable of overwriting other, "weaker" traditions, which are
inherently disparate and vulnerable. In fact, I think the term (and the
concept[s] that it denotes) still has great utility, provided that we remain
fully cognizant of the many ways in which the "other" traditions have through
history and still today left their imprint upon Brahmanical Hinduism. In
fact, in spite of many broad continuities over time, it is this reciprocal
give-and-take between what are considered established Sanskritic elements at any
given time (i.e., as belonging in theory to a pan-Indian Hindu tradition) and
those that have more localized currency in time, space, or social register that
give Hinduism its famous appearance of "unity in diversity."

Both modes of Sanskritization bear comparison with similar processes
elsewhere, such as Hellenization in north Africa and western Asia (esp. after
Alexander), the interactions of Christianity with local and folk traditions, and
so forth. All of these are particular large-scale cases of syncretism (or
syncretization), another potentially useful but hotly contested model.

Since the two processes as I describe them here are always intertwined, the sources below
are not sorted into corresponding groups. Be aware that the sources for
Process A are not up-to-date, and in any case this list is not comprehensive.
(I have now added some suggestions from Amod Lele [marked with *], plus some
additions of my own.)

Hertel, Bradley. 1973.
“Some Dimensions of Sanskritization: Belief, Practice and Egalitarianism among
Hindus of the Gangetic Plain.” Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion
12.1: 17-32; “Errata: Some Dimensions of Sanskritization.” Journal for the
Scientific Study of Religion 12.2: 255.
1974. “Reply to Brown.” Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion
13.2: 225-227.

Lubin, Timothy. 2005. “The Transmission, Patronage, and Prestige of
Brahmanical Piety from the Mauryas to the Guptas.” In Federico Squarcini, ed.,
Boundaries, Dynamics and Construction of Traditions in South Asia,
Firenze: Firenze University Press, 77-103.

Stein, Burton. 1960. “The Economic Function of a Medieval South Indian
Temple.” Journal of Asian Studies 19.2: 163-176.
1967/1968. “Brahman and Peasant in Early South Indian History.” ” Adyar Library
Bulletin 31/32: 229-269.
1968. “Social Mobility and Medieval South Indian Hindu Sects,” in J. Silverberg,
ed., Social Mobility in the Caste System in India, The Hague: Mouton,
78-94.
1980. Peasant State and Society in Medieval South India. Oxford U. P.

Stern, Robert. 1993. Changing India. Cambridge U. P. *

Tambiah, Stanley J. 1967.
Review of Social Change in Modern India by M. N. Srinivas. Modern
Asian Studies 1.4: 404-405.
1970. “The Past and Present in the Study of Religion:
Continuities and Transformations.” Ch. 21 in Buddhism and the Spirit Cults in
North-East Thailand. Cambridge: Cambridge U. P.